Public Accounts Committee on June 1st, 2006

[Paul LeBlanc]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, is your reference to a roadblock of coordination and cooperation among federal players, or with first nations?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Why does it seem there's a problem with federal organizations working closely with the first nations? What's the problem? It seems that it is a problem.

[Paul LeBlanc]

The department and first nations, of course, share the very considerable challenges we're talking about. The very nature of the department's existence has in it a partnership with first nations, and so there's a great incidence of partnership with first nations, flowing from the contracted funding agreements we have to more innovative cooperative endeavours that result in things such as new legislation to fill important gaps. There are a great many instances of a very strong cooperative effort that bears fruit.

The Auditor General referred to complexities in roles that actually contribute to suspicion and to building confidence. In particular, there was reference in the report to this duality of role between providing service with a responsibility for effective service provision for people's well-being and playing the role of a negotiator in terms of claim settlement. That is a reality; those two roles exist within the department, and the department sees ways to mitigate the real or perceived conflict that can flow from them. We quite separate the negotiation role. We have a separate sector of the department that deals with it. The people who provide services are not the people who sit to negotiate the outcomes of claims or treaties.

There are means such as this that are helpful, but I think the very long and complex history and the difficulty of outdated legislation all add to the challenge of having as effective or full a partnership as we'd like to have.

But it's something the department values greatly. The minister values it greatly and spoke about it energetically again yesterday. Every step forward in terms of important innovations, and certainly our policy work, involves a close dialogue and consultations with first nations.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Here's my last question.

I think what's important—and we get so caught up in the politics of it and everything else that sometimes we forget—is that there are many people and people's lives involved in this. The main question I have for you is, what would you like to tell us as parliamentarians about how we can help you make these people's lives better?

[Paul LeBlanc]

Well, you know, I think the role of the department and the role of officials is to work with the appropriations that Parliament passes, to work within the policy frameworks that the government decides upon, and to enact the legislation that government deems fit to go forward.

Our job, in addition to that, is to provide the government with the best possible advice. The department's committed to doing that and will continue to do that in the future.

Another member talked about the turnover in the department. I can give you only an anecdotal response. For instance, I have been with the department 18 months, but I have travelled across the country, and I've been struck by how many people have been committed to the department for a very long time, who really identify very strongly with the importance of the work they do, who understand that their actions affect the lives of Canadians. They care very deeply about it, as does our political leadership.

I think the government's focusing a priority on this key area is important. The work of the committees is obviously extremely important, and the department seeks to benefit very much from the reflection and the recommendations of the committee, as it does from the work of the Auditor General.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. LeBlanc.

We are now moving to Mr. Christopherson.

Mr. Christopherson, five minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To pick up on your last comment, Mr. LeBlanc, I'm disappointed to hear you have only been there 18 months, not because of you personally, one way or the other, but given that leadership and change of leadership has been a problem, now it means we have a brand new minister and a second in command who hasn't been there all that long either. It is a problem. It would be really nice to find one of you talented folks who could stay there long enough to really make these things happen.

Anyway, I want to pick up on the last thing you said to me in the last go around. I don't have the benefit of the blues. We can check, but I think you made a pretty strong commitment around ensuring that there would be the kind of strategy that I was focusing on in my earlier comments and that the Auditor General has focused on.

What I'd like to hear from you is, number one, does that mean that you are assuming responsibility for the lead; in other words, your department will be answerable for the development of said strategy? Secondly, just as importantly, please give me a deadline. Give me a timeline for when a comprehensive report will be ready.

[Paul LeBlanc]

Our objective is to merge the three departments in question with the enhanced strategic plan or the strategy the Auditor General recommended by the fall of 2006. I don't have a more precise date, but the fall of this year. The departments continue to resolve to work together.

I cannot, as an official of one department, provide myself a mandate of authority over any other department. But I can assure the committee that we recognize the importance of that. Leadership is shown, and it will continue to be shown, but I cannot designate myself as the--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

No, I appreciate that, sir. The fall of 2006. We have another timeframe. We'll see what happens there. Hopefully it'll be better than the last. Unless we fall, I'm going to be here to find out. There will be others of us around, even if you're not there--which is distinctly possible, given the way things go.

I have to tell you, it's still unacceptable that nobody is taking some ownership of this. Two of the key players are here, and I understand the hierarchy. But to walk away from this table, Mr. Chair, without somebody taking the lead, when we have Health and Indian Affairs right here, is frustrating. I'd say it's unacceptable, but I realize I could push that string forever, and you're never going to be able to make that commitment. You can't.

Maybe we can get from you, then, a commitment that you will ensure that your deputy will advise this committee in writing whether or not he assumes that responsibility on behalf of his department, and if not, who will. Would you undertake to ask your deputy to provide us with that letter?

[Paul LeBlanc]

Mr. Chair, I--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes or no would work.

[Paul LeBlanc]

I note the request, and I will certainly raise the issue with the deputy, as I will all of the matters concerned.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

All right, I'll go through another route. That's fine. I'll take care of that one another way.

I just want to mention the treaties. I'm so close to Caledonia, I have to. We haven't done an awful lot here, and I know we can't go too far into this, but I do feel obliged to raise the issue of the treaties and the concerns that the Auditor General has raised in terms of the amount of time.

I understand from a preliminary Q and A that the Caledonia situation doesn't necessarily fit exactly into this category of review. The Auditor General is nodding that that's correct. Nonetheless, they are related. It was still an unresolved treaty that triggered it.

Can you address that, please? I feel some need to hold some account at this level as to why we aren't getting the treaties done as quickly, given that there have been undertakings on the part of the department to expedite them, and all those kinds of words. Can you give us some assurance that we're not going to continue to see these kinds of reports year after year, knowing the kinds of problems it can and does create?

[Paul LeBlanc]

I mentioned a few moments ago, for reasons that are fairly evident and that the Auditor General touched upon, that the whole area of treaty negotiation is a very specific area within the department. It is not one over which I have any authority. I have colleagues who work in that area and have expertise.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm sorry. Can I interrupt?

Can I ask why, given that it was a focus of the report, there isn't somebody here from the department, if not you, who can speak to it?

[Paul LeBlanc]

I would certainly note the issues and respond to the committee in writing, if the committee so requests, and we would certainly endeavour to have all the necessary expertise at a later date.

I will say, though, on the key point of your question in relation to the importance, that it is an area of importance. The government, by way of the minister, has indicated that it is a priority area, and the minister has said as much before Parliament in committee very recently.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I wish we had a little more time to go into that.

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you, Mr. LeBlanc, and everyone else.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

On behalf of everyone on the committee, I want to thank--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Could I propose, Mr. Chair, on the issue of the strategy around the mould, that this committee request that the deputy minister either acknowledge that they are the lead or provide in that letter who is the designated lead?

That's the whole point that the Auditor General was making. We've gone through two hours, and we still don't have it. So can we at least request that letter from the deputy minister, saying “Take the lead, or point to whoever will”?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Does everyone agree with Mr. Christopherson's recommendation?

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

What's his recommendation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Do you want to repeat it, Mr. Christopherson?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Sure. With regard to the mould that causes health problems, one of the key points that the Auditor General has pointed out that has caused the failings is the lack of (a) a strategy, and (b) a department that takes ownership. There are three entities involved: Health Canada, CMHC, and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. The people here today, because they're not at the deputy level, can't commit, and I'm asking that we send a letter to the deputy minister asking him to confirm that his department will take the lead and be responsible and accountable, or will provide in the letter the department that is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Christopherson--

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I'd like add something on it. To the ones that have initiatives with some private ownership of their own residence, I'd also like to know whether they're experiencing these same sorts of problems.